As things currently stand, McCain is the only Repug with a reasonable shot at winning the presidency. And yes, he is a serious threat to the entire notion of peace on the planet.......But so is Hillary in my estimation.

Help us Obi-bama, you're our only hope now.

--And what thin hopes they are.

Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/9/2008

ALL of the above GOP candidates are dangerous threats (NB: Ron Paul is not on the list).

B-Kool is right: what thin hopes we're stuck with.

Posted by Lit at 01/9/2008

Giuliani or McCain are a continuation of the Bush/Cheney war-centric focus of our public policy. America can't afford to waste another cent on the "perpetual war with Islamic fundamentalists", and therefore Democrats need to unite around the only candidate in the race that will address the root causes of terrorism so we no longer have to live in fear - Barack Obama

Posted by Metteyya at 01/10/2008

Only The Nation can run articles on the destructive nature of partisan politics and the danger of negative political advertising; then sit down and decide on the most partisan, negative way to word their poll questions.

Posted by bean22 at 01/10/2008

All of the above should be a choice.

Posted by stimbox at 01/10/2008

There was a fighter pilot named McCain whose mommy told him God and Countryto be a man so he bombed some rice paddies for his mommy and daddy now he's saying "BOMB, BOMB, BOMB IRAN!" (He's running a war hero's campaign!)

When I was in Vietnam I met a college AFROTC classmate briefly. He had just gotten there. It was my day off. At breakfast in he officer's mess, he told me he was gonna fly OV-10 Bronco's out of DaNang. He said "it's good for my career. I wanna get into the action." Later I heard that he had been shot down over the Ho Chi Minh Trail, his second mission. When I came home from Vietnam, having seen the carpet bombing over said trail, and a lot more, I joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War and wrote to Senator Tom McIntyre, (D, NH), who voted to end the bombing and the funding via the Church-Hatfield bill, and my classmate and John McCain came home to heroes welcome, while I sat at my folks house in disgrace, but not shame. I was proud.

Posted by Jim Willingham at 01/10/2008

As things currently stand, McCain is the only Repug with a reasonable shot at winning the presidency. And yes, he is a serious threat to the entire notion of peace on the planet.......But so is Hillary in my estimation.

Posted by B_KOOL_66 01/09/2008 @ 1:30pm

We agree on McCain, and the other Republickins, but not on Hillary Clinton. She is driven by specifics and knows how to translate social-ethical issues into legislation. I believe that she learned from her mistake about the vote to empower Bush to parlay himself into war on Iraq. Many of us have experienced growth during our histories. I spent a year in Vietnam flying a hearse and carrying ammo, including land mines, then I woke up and became a protestor to the dysfunctional and tragic abuse of power with all it's moral-ethical ramifications. Senator McIntyre, in my prior post, was a hawk for the Vietnam War, then became part of the profound movement to end it.

Senator Clinton is astute and has foresight as well as intellectual authenticity. She is not a threat to America, only to the neo-cons and rabid extremists. I have shifted my vote intentions and will be voting for her in the Florida primary. Mr Obama will have to wait.

Posted by Jim Willingham at 01/10/2008

whoops, Senator Obama may have to wait. May not. I don't disagree that he offers profound possibility, but will need more than charisma to get the job done should he become the prez. He will be able to run the executive dept well enough, but don't underextimate the resistance he will come up against from the congress, unless he carries a plurality there. Clinton in an infighter. May the better woman win!

Posted by Jim Willingham at 01/10/2008

Posted by JIM WILLINGHAM 01/10/2008 @ 3:33pm

In case you haven't heard, Jim, the Democratic party has stripped Florida from its delegates at the convention in Denver because they tried to steal the focus of the presidential campaign by violating the rules that "all" Democrats agreed to.

And Hillary is worst candidate the Democrats could possibly nominate, as she would simply galvanize the Republicans to vote against her, which requires us to run another divisive election in which dirty tricks determine the outcome.

It really is time for a change, don't you think?

Posted by Metteyya at 01/10/2008

Think Giuliani's crazy? Wait until you see Giuliani Time [giulianitime.com]

Posted by CinemActivist at 01/10/2008

The Greatest threat to what?

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/11/2008

The question is presumptive, since many might not consider that these guys DO threaten us in the manner subscribed.

I might ask the same question of some of the DEMS.

A little objectivity if you please

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/11/2008

Jim Willingham,

I have a good deal of respect for your opinions here based on what you've written and how you've written it, as well as the captivating biographical backstory you posted below.

I'm a former Marine myself, and although I prefer to avoid any mention of the fact, my peacetime military service has had a profound and positive impact on who I am today. I met some interesting and admirable characters in the USMC, and I sometimes think of them, particularly when I write in these threads with some fire and conviction. The people I respect the most are those who have the courage of their convictions, and the concerns of the common man or woman in their cross-hairs. One of the outstanding features of the USMC, in my opinion, is their emphasis on taking care of those who are under your command.

That is possibly responsible for the nearly subconscious reason that I am deeply mistrustful of Hillary Clinton --I just don't see any courage of convictions in regards to the plight of the average citizen.

If you haven't read the fascinating three part series at CounterPunch.org detailing Hillary's backstory, I recommend it most enthusiastically.

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

~Cheers, B

Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/11/2008

I voted for Giuliani, since he's basically Mussolini minus the idealistic elements of Italian Fascism, but perhaps McCain is a greater threat, due to the fact that he A) stands a far more realistic chance of becoming President, and B) might be reckless enough to get us into a real, shooting war with Russia and/or China.

Posted by Kevin_OKeeffe at 01/12/2008

"I believe that she learned from her mistake about the vote to empower Bush to parlay himself into war on Iraq." Posted by JIM WILLINGHAM 01/10/2008 @ 3:33pm

Problem with that is she said she supports incursions into Iran. So no she hasn't learned. She poses a threat to us too. She has also said she opposes attempt at diplomatic attempts to talk to countries like North Korea.

Posted by Cccomfo1 at 01/12/2008

A petty stupid poll given that we are told "why" one or another is dangerous rather than being allowed our own reasons for voting thus.

Posted by Scawsby at 01/13/2008

John McCain, not for the reason listed, but because he could beat some of the Dem candidates, and because he'll continue too many of GWB policies.

Because I can't have Kucinich, I'll settle for Edwards as the best progressive hope. He would beat McCain or any of the others.

Posted by adr at 01/14/2008

This is the first poll I've seen where Ron Paul was left out and it's appropriate .

All of them scare me from 10,000 year occupation McCain and double Guantanamo Romney to Christian Soldier Huck and anything for Israel Rudy .

But all the dems scare me as much .

Only Ron believes in us as adults not needing the political class's nanny police to take our capacity for decision from us .

Posted by Bob Armstrong at 01/14/2008

Perception matters as much as, or more than, reality. Giuliani is widely viewed as a wild-eyed Chicken Little, screaming that the sky is falling. He's a one-trick pony with no qualifications for the presidency. McCain, by contrast, can say the looniest things in a very calm, rational tone of voice, a voice that declares, "I know what I'm talking about." That makes him the most dangerous.

Posted by fabian955 at 01/16/2008

Nothing, not even Plutocracy, scares me as much as Theocracy, so it's Huck in my book (I know, you could say the same about Romney but he wouldn't have the same base).

Posted by Harlock at 01/16/2008

Romney is Bush on steriods, as Bush was to Reagan. All seek to continue expanding world business elitism, i.e., USA, Inc. versus USA. Their agenda consists of, among other top goals, the elimination of an organized labor class, by making all believe they are entrepreneurs. If all are entrepreneurs, then all are anti-labor. No unions, no uppity poor. (Private sector USA is currently 92% union-free). Ergo, wealth elites traverse the globe exchanging markets, family, entertainment, and wealth –all with the pleasures of a subservient population who’ll fight each other for the right to work (serving the wealthy) for less and less.

Posted by MickeyLong at 01/20/2008

They are all scary! However, McCain is the scariest because he has the best chance of winning in a general election. If you go to www.glassbooth.org you can take an interesting little survey that will pair you up with the candidates that most match your policy views and will show you in order whom you are most close or far away from in your views. In that survey, fully based on policy and voting records, McCain scored barely higher for me than Giuliani (my #1 was unsurprisingly D. Kucinich)... And while I like Ron Paul better than other republicans, wouldn't it have been fair to include him in the poll? I mean, he would make it his policy to destroy public schools and Medicare if he won!

Posted by nikkivine at 01/20/2008